County Boards of Education - Student Technology Use Policy - Requirements
HB 163 requires every county board of education in Maryland to develop and adopt a student technology use policy governing personal electronic devices during school hours. The bill defines personal electronic devices broadly to include smartphones, tablets, laptops, smartwatches, and smartglasses. Under the required policy, elementary and middle school students must be prohibited from using personal electronic devices during school hours, while high school students must face a limitation on use during school hours rather than a complete ban.
The bill also preserves several exceptions. A student may still use a device when the use is required by an individualized education program (IEP) or Section 504 plan, to address a documented health issue, or when an educator or administrator directs use for educational purposes. County boards must publish the policy on their website and in student handbooks, and the policy must be reviewed every two years. The bill also directs county boards to create enforcement procedures and disciplinary measures, including in-school suspension for violations, and it takes effect July 1, 2026.
HB 163 would add a new section to the Education Article, creating a statewide framework that requires local school systems to regulate student use of personal electronic devices during school hours. It would not directly ban devices statewide, but it would mandate that each county board adopt a policy meeting minimum standards for elementary, middle, and high school students, while allowing local boards some discretion in how they limit use and enforce the rules. The bill would affect county boards of education, school administrators, students, and families, and it would interact with existing special education and student health accommodations under IEPs and Section 504 plans.
The available context suggests the bill was introduced as a policy response to concerns about student phone and device use in schools, with no recorded committee testimony or votes provided in the materials. The bill’s structure indicates a generally supportive or reform-oriented approach toward limiting distractions in the classroom while preserving exceptions for educational, medical, and disability-related needs. Because no vote history or transcript excerpts are included, there is no direct evidence of formal support or opposition in the record provided.
The main points of contention likely center on how restrictive the policy should be, especially for high school students, and how much discretion county boards should have in setting and enforcing rules. Potential concerns include whether a near-ban for younger students is too rigid, whether disciplinary measures such as in-school suspension are appropriate, and how schools should balance device restrictions with accessibility needs, health monitoring, and instructional uses. Another likely issue is local control versus statewide uniformity, since the bill requires county boards to adopt policies but sets mandatory minimum standards for what those policies must include.